Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2009
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:52 PM, chromatic<chromatic@wgz.org> wrote: > 1) No one has compiled a list of wants and needs from various stakeholders > > 2) No one has compiled a comprehensive list of likely stakeholders > > 3) All of the proposals assume some wants and needs and deemphasize others, so > many of them are contradictory > > 4) The only person capable of setting down an edict we'd all follow won't set > down any edict other than "Be nice to each other while you figure this out" That sounds more like "product management" to me. I find side projects like perl5i or Chip's fork interesting in part because they at least solve #4. As I said at YAPC about core perl development: "we're an anarcho-syndicalist commune...." > 5) The people who can change the release process are the ones who can release > a new version of Perl, and they don't scale. > > Thus the status quo perpetuates itself, and I don't believe you *want* a > project manager. I don't think that's quite fair. Leaving aside release frequency debates, there's been some good progress on defining several of the things that need to change. (E.g. Nicholas' definition of how to test stability) But (a) it's crunch time for a release and (b) Perl is the proverbial oil tanker and will take a while to change course. -- DavidThread Previous | Thread Next